On May 23, 1959, on the front page, the ''Times'' recorded the following: "Extremists have no place in the Cuban revolution, Premier Fidel Castro said in a television interview....In the same broadcast the Premier dashed hopes of United States sugar interests to save their properties from seizure under the new land reform law." An editorial in the same issue the ''Times'' declared: "It is encouraging to see Premier Fidel Castro of Cuba facing up to the Communists as he did in his television interview . . . The aims of the Cuban Reds, with their links to Moscow and their totalitarian philosophy, were bound to be contrary, in the long run, to the aims of the 26th of July movement, which fought for democracy, freedom, social justice and - rather unhappily - for an extreme nationalism."

On May 23, 1959, on the front page, the ''Times'' recorded the following: "Extremists have no place in the Cuban revolution, Premier Fidel Castro said in a television interview....In the same broadcast the Premier dashed hopes of United States sugar interests to save their properties from seizure under the new land reform law." An editorial in the same issue the ''Times'' declared: "It is encouraging to see Premier Fidel Castro of Cuba facing up to the Communists as he did in his television interview . . . The aims of the Cuban Reds, with their links to Moscow and their totalitarian philosophy, were bound to be contrary, in the long run, to the aims of the 26th of July movement, which fought for democracy, freedom, social justice and - rather unhappily - for an extreme nationalism."

−

After Castro seized power, on July 16, 1959 the ''New York Times'' front page carried a story by Herbert L. Matthews:

+

After Castro seized power, on July 16, 1959 the ''New York Times'' front page carried a story by Herbert L. Matthews:{{QuoteBox|This is not a Communist revolution in any sense of the word and there are no Communists in positions of control. This is the overwhelming consensus among Cubans in the best position to know and this writer subscribes to that opinion after searching inquiries and talks with Cubans in all walks of life and with many Americans....<br><br>There seem to be very few in Cuba - and one need have no hesitation in saying this - who believe Fidel Castro is a Communist, is under Communist influence or is a dupe of communism...<br><br>There are no Reds in the Cabinet and none in high positions in the Government or army in the sense of being able to control either governmental or defense policies. The only power worth considering in Cuba is in the hands of Premier Castro, who is not only not Communist but decidedly anti-Communist. . .<br><br>Premier Castro is avoiding [[election]]s in Cuba for two reasons. He feels that his social revolution now has dynamism and vast popular consent, and he does not want to interrupt the process. Moreover, most observers would agree that Cubans today do not want elections. The reason is that elections in the past have merely meant to them the coming of corrupt politicians seeking the spoils of power. }}On December 2, 1961 Castro announced that he was forming:{{QuoteBox| a "united party of Cuba's Socialist revolution," a monolithic organization like the Soviet Communist party with restricted membership....[He] acknowledged that he was a Marxist-Leninist and said that he was taking Cuba down the path to communism. He maintained that the world, too, "is on the road toward communism." . . .I am a Marxist-Leninist and will be one until the day I die".}}Castro added that by 1953, three years before his insurrection in Cuba, his political thinking "was more or less like what it is now." Herbert L Matthews after his days as a reporter in Havana was promoted to the Editorial Board of the ''New York Times.''

−

{{QuoteBox|This is not a Communist revolution in any sense of the word and there are no Communists in positions of control. This is the overwhelming consensus among Cubans in the best position to know and this writer subscribes to that opinion after searching inquiries and talks with Cubans in all walks of life and with many Americans....<br><br>There seem to be very few in Cuba - and one need have no hesitation in saying this - who believe Fidel Castro is a Communist, is under Communist influence or is a dupe of communism...<br><br>There are no Reds in the Cabinet and none in high positions in the Government or army in the sense of being able to control either governmental or defense policies. The only power worth considering in Cuba is in the hands of Premier Castro, who is not only not Communist but decidedly anti-Communist. . .<br><br>

+

−

Premier Castro is avoiding [[election]]s in Cuba for two reasons. He feels that his social revolution now has dynamism and vast popular consent, and he does not want to interrupt the process. Moreover, most observers would agree that Cubans today do not want elections. The reason is that elections in the past have merely meant to them the coming of corrupt politicians seeking the spoils of power. }}

+

−

On December 2, 1961 Castro announced that he was forming:

+

−

{{QuoteBox| a "united party of Cuba's Socialist revolution," a monolithic organization like the Soviet Communist party with restricted membership....[He] acknowledged that he was a Marxist-Leninist and said that he was taking Cuba down the path to communism. He maintained that the world, too, "is on the road toward communism." . . .I am a Marxist-Leninist and will be one until the day I die".}}

+

−

Castro added that by 1953, three years before his insurrection in Cuba, his political thinking "was more or less like what it is now." Herbert L Matthews after his days as a reporter in Havana was promoted to the Editorial Board of the ''New York Times.''

+

===Evil Empire===

===Evil Empire===

Revision as of 04:28, 25 January 2013

The New York Times (NYT) is a newspaper published in New York City and distributed worldwide. It was first published in 1851, and is often referred to as the Old Grey Lady. It is the third most widely circulated newspaper in the United States behind and The Wall Street Journal and USA Today.[1]

The New York Times is generally thought to promote a liberal point of view.[2][3] This was recently acknowledged by Arthur Brisbane, the departing public editor at the New York Times:

The "public editor" of the New York Times accused his employers of harboring progressive bias on topics like gay marriage and the occupy movement. [2]

Its publisher, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr. has denied this, claiming instead that the paper has an "urban" viewpoint.[4] However, in the summer of 2004, the newspaper's then public editor (ombudsman), Daniel Okrent, published a piece on the Times' liberal bias, citing the example of its coverage of homosexual marriage.[5]

Contents

Conservative organizations claim that the Times promotes the homosexual agenda, because it employs homosexuals and wins praise from homosexual groups. In 2001 Richard Berke, the Times' national political correspondent, revealed that "on any given day, three-fourths of those attending the daily meeting where it is decided what will be on the front page of the Times, are likely to be 'not-so-closeted' homosexuals." [6] In 2004, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) gave the New York Times an award for "Outstanding Newspaper Overall Coverage", specifically citing journalist Frank Rich's article attacking President Ronald Reagan's record on AIDS.[7]

In 2008, ABC journalist John Stossel claimed: "The reason the Times, and to a lesser extent the Post, are so important, and they are, is because the TV and radio - all of the media - copy it sycophantically. That's how bias at the Times becomes bias in other media."[8]

Examples of types of liberal bias utilized by the New York Times include:

Newspaper of Record

Soviet crimes against humanity

In 1931, Times correspondent Walter Duranty intentionally covered up the Sovietgenocide of the Ukrainians.[10] Duranty not only helped conceal all evidence of Holodomor, but also called other journalists who reported on it liars.[11][12] The lack of knowledge of this genocide was observed by English writer George Orwell, who commented "huge events like the Ukraine famine of 1933, involving the deaths of millions of people, have actually escaped the attention of the majority of English Russophiles".[13] The Soviets managed to cover this up until Ukraine’s independence in 1991. Official Soviet documents recently declassified revealed that the genocide was indeed intended to target the Ukrainian people[14].

Maosim

Most Americans who have visited Red China are accused of arriving at their judgements according to previously held prejudices. None denies, however, that in Communist China they have found matters of law and order, public health, equitable distribution of food and wealth, and other operations of Government carried out with greater earnestness and success than elsewhere in China or in most of Asia. . .
Another certainty is that the idea they represent, the hope they hold for the landless, overtaxed Chinese peasant, is not one that can be destroyed by force. . .

The appaling figures on murders committed by the Beijing Communist government are neither propaganda, exaggerations nor guesses. Since the Communists drove Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalists off the mainland in 1949, official accounts in Red newspapers have listed the executions of millions of Chinese. . .
. . . The real total of Chinese deaths administered by Beijing probably would total a great deal more than the estimates. Few Chinese marked for death by Beijing had a chance to escape their executioners. The Communists masked their real intentions with a deceptively mild, restrained and orderly entry to power.[16][17]

Promoting Castro

Cuban President Fulgencia Batista (left) welcoming U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt (right). Batista, a signatory of the Atlantic Charter, was overtherown by communist revolutionary Fidel Castro.

The front page of the New York Times on April 18, 1959 read, "Premier Fidel Castro of Cuba denied today charges of Communist influence in his regime. In a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors he asserted: 'I have said very clearly that we are not Communists...our revolution is a humanistic one'". In an editorial later, the Times commented Castro "made it quite clear that neither he nor anyone of importance in his Government so far as he knew was Communist or in agreement with communism."

On May 23, 1959, on the front page, the Times recorded the following: "Extremists have no place in the Cuban revolution, Premier Fidel Castro said in a television interview....In the same broadcast the Premier dashed hopes of United States sugar interests to save their properties from seizure under the new land reform law." An editorial in the same issue the Times declared: "It is encouraging to see Premier Fidel Castro of Cuba facing up to the Communists as he did in his television interview . . . The aims of the Cuban Reds, with their links to Moscow and their totalitarian philosophy, were bound to be contrary, in the long run, to the aims of the 26th of July movement, which fought for democracy, freedom, social justice and - rather unhappily - for an extreme nationalism."

After Castro seized power, on July 16, 1959 the New York Times front page carried a story by Herbert L. Matthews:

This is not a Communist revolution in any sense of the word and there are no Communists in positions of control. This is the overwhelming consensus among Cubans in the best position to know and this writer subscribes to that opinion after searching inquiries and talks with Cubans in all walks of life and with many Americans....

There seem to be very few in Cuba - and one need have no hesitation in saying this - who believe Fidel Castro is a Communist, is under Communist influence or is a dupe of communism...

There are no Reds in the Cabinet and none in high positions in the Government or army in the sense of being able to control either governmental or defense policies. The only power worth considering in Cuba is in the hands of Premier Castro, who is not only not Communist but decidedly anti-Communist. . .

Premier Castro is avoiding elections in Cuba for two reasons. He feels that his social revolution now has dynamism and vast popular consent, and he does not want to interrupt the process. Moreover, most observers would agree that Cubans today do not want elections. The reason is that elections in the past have merely meant to them the coming of corrupt politicians seeking the spoils of power.

On December 2, 1961 Castro announced that he was forming:

a "united party of Cuba's Socialist revolution," a monolithic organization like the Soviet Communist party with restricted membership....[He] acknowledged that he was a Marxist-Leninist and said that he was taking Cuba down the path to communism. He maintained that the world, too, "is on the road toward communism." . . .I am a Marxist-Leninist and will be one until the day I die".

Castro added that by 1953, three years before his insurrection in Cuba, his political thinking "was more or less like what it is now." Herbert L Matthews after his days as a reporter in Havana was promoted to the Editorial Board of the New York Times.

Evil Empire

When on March 8, 1983 Ronald Regan called the Soviet Union where people were routinely sent to Gulags an “Evil Empire”, a prominent liberal intellectual Anthony Lewis of the New York Times commented two days later that the speech was “primitive...simplistic theology” and "a mirror image of crude Soviet rhetoric". But when news of the speech reached Natan Sharansky, confined to an eight-by-ten foot cell on the Siberian border, the reaction was different: “Tapping on walls and talking through toilets, word of Reagan’s ‘provocation’ quickly spread throughout the prison. We dissidents were ecstatic. Finally, the leader of the free world had spoken the truth — a truth that burned inside the heart of each and every one of us.”[18]

Fabrications and scandals

In 2003, Times reporter Jayson Blair resigned after it was found that he had engaged in repeated plagiarism and deceit, copying articles from other newspapers and fabricating information. [19]

The New York Times is known to defend America's enemies, discount terrorist acts or present stories as not to offend Muslim feelings. As with the case of American students who carried out suicide bombings in Somalia. In the NYT article "A Call to Jihad, Answered in America," the issue was a “crisis of belonging,” “They want to belong, but who do they belong to?” Then the author states that these jihadist were “born-agains” or “fundis,” not how the rest of America describes Islamic fascism. [24]

Coverage of the Military

Like everything else liberal, supporting America's fighting men and women is a burden for the paper. If it is a sensitive matter that would endanger the lives of our troops, they shrug the concerns off and post photos of American troops abusing prisoners in Iraq. In a liberal 'cause for concern', a New York Times repoter was kidnapped in Afghanistan by the Taliban, December 2008. The Times colluded with all the news organizations to keep it secret, not to endanger the reporter. [25]

“

The Associated Press and most other Western news outlets respected a request from the Times to not report on the abductions because the publicity could negatively affect hostage rescue efforts and imperil Rohde's life.

↑Fr. George Rutler. Recollections of Reagan. Pewsitter.com. “Many of our cultural elite were uncomfortable when on March 8, 1983 he called the Soviet Union an “Evil Empire.” Anthony Lewis of the New York Times said the speech was “primitive...simplistic theology” and Henry Steele Commager of Columbia University called it “the worst speech ever given by an American president.” But when news of the speech reached Natan Sharansky, confined to an eight-by-ten foot cell on the Siberian border, the reaction was different: “Tapping on walls and talking through toilets, word of Reagan’s ‘provocation’ quickly spread throughout the prison. We dissidents were ecstatic. Finally, the leader of the free world had spoken the truth — a truth that burned inside the heart of each and every one of us.””